Why Resentment? And, The War of Symbols.

There seems to be a collection of largely negative views towards a number of broad categories at this board. Some examples being religious affiliation and non-religious affiliation, as well as the manner in which people conduct themselves in modern times. I'm only asking: why harbor the resentment? Why seek to tear down and falsify these people and their ways aggressively? Is their some sort of revenge needed? What I am speaking of is the apparent need of several board posters to not contribute a positive solution to discussion, but argue the validity of a negative observation of an idea. "Modernity is decay because of focus on the individual, we need focus on the community..." but how? Are you going to use a positive means of doing so that actually encourages others of following your path? Because, as far as I can see, not doing so results in them declaring war on you. You lament this, but do nothing to bypass it. I just would like to know why, as I find myself joyfully pursuing my values. Perhaps I'll fail, and if so I'll redefine my methods and goals, but I prefer to move instead of idly stand by in complaint. As far as the religious against non-religious debate is concerned, I see a war of symbols. We can point out what's wrong with atheism or Christianity, but seem little able to create valid solutions to the problems therein. I personally see little wrong with both beliefs, as I have met stable individuals of both denominations. I also find little use in identifying the wrong, and think it more healthy to identify negative trends within the thinking and acting of the majority of people today and counter-act them effectively. What I mean by effectively is actually making use of these symbols, as pointing out the flaws of their followers seems to incite little more than aggression. Work within these symbols and simply adapt their manner of thinking to your own. I know this was previously mentioned in another thread, but discussion with a user at the forums has provoked thought for myself in this area. People are going to require archetypes that encourage value and action, as some people require direction in order to undertake the pursuit of a goal or the adoption of a value. Instead of bashing the archetypes themselves, can't we use them to our advantage? If people are prone to selecting these affiliations to guide their actions, shouldn't those with healthy ideas be defining the outlines of these associations? For instance, I plan to run for a position on the county seat, and will most likely be advertising myself as a conservative republican, the predominant political choice of the area of the Midwest that I live in. I hope to use this position to encourage not conservative republican ideas, but ideas I feel will benefit the community to the greatest degree. I use generally well-liked symbols of focus on family, community, education, and self-sufficiency. As these ideas play into my ideology, I have no problem making use of them. And honestly, who DOESN'T want a community based on those values? The war of symbols just seems to dilute the process of defining a path and following it, as when someone works towards doing so it isn't often the path that leads to failure, but the inability to create one at the behest of those who seem to prefer non-choice to choice; most likely because this allows them free movement within a community without expectation. You know, no negative consequences for being too lazy to help build the schoolhouse. Further commentary would be helpful.

You raise a very valid point, but I think it's important to remember that a multifaceted approach is often the best. To use you example of religion, transforming a religion from within is probably the most effective and practical approach. However, religions are almost universally self limiting. Overthrowing them and establishing new systems will eventually be necessary. Therefore, the best approach would be one that molds religions to better values AND illuminates the inherent flaws within them, as opposed to an EITHER/OR situation. I think the real question is what is the most effective combination/ratio.

On the topic of resentment, I can only say that I'm highly resentful of the fact that I live in a world full of idiotic mobs. This has usually manifested itself in anti-social behavior and bitterness, but as I've grown up, I'm now trying to process my resentment/anger/hatred into a positive/motivational force. My success varies.

#1- Is there some sort of revenge needed? What I am speaking of is the apparent need of several board posters to not contribute a positive solution to discussion, but argue the validity of a negative observation of an idea.

#2 -"Modernity is decay because of focus on the individual, we need focus on the community..." but how?

@#1:

Revenge is the universal mentality of those who perceive they cannot change direction, so instead of fighting to win they fight to hinder/destroy. Wars of attrition are not as decisive as clear political-military victories. Revenge and resentment are the universal traits of Crowdism, and underscore liberalism and populism (including neo-Nazism) of all forms. "We cannot change our future, so let's find an enemy to hate."

@#2:

How to focus on the community:

Participate in community activities: government, religion, education and commerce. Do so in a sane and balanced way.

Gain political power by working with established parties to right wrongs.

In your neighborhood, reach out to others with the same values.

Join extant groups (like 2600) and contribute, also don't back down on your ideas

The last thing you want to do is become a creature of resentment like most neo-Nazis: tell everyone the world is fucked, it's gone all wrong, and demand absolute adherence to extreme solutions directly, instead of nurturing people toward them gently and patiently. Work with your community and its institutions; rejecting them is a path to becoming resentful and inactive, like all the people at stormfront.org, vnnforum.com, skadi, apricity, etc.

Is there some sort of revenge needed? What I am speaking of is the apparent need of several board posters to not contribute a positive solution to discussion, but argue the validity of a negative observation of an idea.

I think part of it is how far you've progressed. The desire for revenge is the natural feeling when one first realizes how messed up the world is. After having lived with the revelation for a while, the desire for revenge subsides and one desires to be proactive. Before ever reaching that state however, one must first see the negative. Not everyone on this forum has reached the same level of understanding; therefore topics about the negative aspects of the world are necessary. Besides, there are plenty of threads about positive activities, though I would like to see more, and I've heard the phrase "Victory, Not Vengeance" several times on this forum.